INUIT INFANTICIDE
“. . . migrations, forced upon . . .(the Inuit). . . during the long,
severe winter, involve the transportation of the entire
household. Utensils, bedding, tools, weapons, furs, hides,
garments and fishing gear must be hauled on the sled or
carried on the back. If there should be a new baby in the
family, the mother must decide whether or not the pack she
must carry is more important than the infant. In most cases
the decision is made in favor of the pack. Especially is this
true if the infant is a female.” (Garber 1947:100)
Copper River Inuit
“Often the parents are unwilling to rear their children,
for a baby involves much hardship to the mother,
especially in the summer when all the household good
are packed on the back.
The child is only an
additional burden to the mother up to the age when it
can make a long day’s journey on its own feet.
Frequently the parents settle the problem by simply
suffocating their baby and throwing it away.” (Jenness
1913-1918:165-166)
Conditions of extreme ecological pressure:
•
Kadjak and Iksivalitak were starving on their way to Pelly Bay. They
were dragging their sled and were so weak that they could hardly pull
anymore. Their adopted son Pupupuk, about 8 years old, could not
walk anymore; so they abandoned him, still alive.
•
Apitok was starving with her husband and little daughter. The hunter
could not follow anymore and fell behind. Then Apitok, dragging a
little led with the girl in it, joined Itoriksak’s family, also on the move.
Itoriksak asked Apitok to kill the girl, which she did, although with
some hesitation.
•
“Once when there was a famine Nagtak gave birth to a child, while
people lay around her dying of hunger. What did that child want here?
How could it live when its mother who should give it life was herself
dried up and starving? So she strangled it and allowed it to freeze
and later on ate it.” (Rasmussen 1931:138, as told to him by the
shaman, Samik)
Alaska Inuit:
“Infanticide is common among them, both before and
after birth. . . . they say they do not want and cannot
support so many daughters. Other women do not like
the care and trouble of children, and destroy them for
that reason. The usual method is to take the child out,
stuff its mouth full of grass, and desert it.” (Dall
1870:139)
PREFERENTIAL FEMALE INFANTICIDE
“Female infanticide is common among some of the
tribes, particularly the Mahlemute and those of the
Yukon. Many Indian mothers to save their daughters
from their own wretched lives, take them out into the
woods, stuff grass in their mouths and leave them to
die.” (Jackson 1880:115)
One case described by Rasmussen (1931:11). Orpingalik
had had 20 children, of which 10 girls had been killed, 4
boys died of disease, 1 son drowned, and 4 sons and 1
daughter were alive. (Balikci 1967:619)
Orpingalik’s 10 daughters were killed under his orders.
None of these daughters were allowed to live. When the
last daughter was born, the fish catch was very good
when the news of her birth reached him. He finished his
spearing and returned to the tent, allowing the girl to live.
“It was thus owing to his good mood at that moment that
the girl owes her happy existence.” (paraphrased from
Van de Velde 1954:6)
“Among all the tribes infanticide has been practiced to
some extent, but probably only females or children of
widows or widowers have been murdered in this way, the
latter on account of the difficulty of providing for them.”
(Boas 1884-1885:580)
“Famine and starvation, however, are not the only causes
leading to infanticide. Occasionally, it happens that a
fickle, mentally deficient woman will give birth to a baby
she does not want. . . . I have in mind the case of an Inuit
mother . . . who killed her baby and fed it to the dogs.”
(Garber 1947:98-99)
“Among the Inuits and Utes of Alaska, I have found both drowning
and freezing the modus operandi for the destruction of unwanted
children. . . . On one occasion, I had departed from the village of
Sfanagamute with my dog team, directing my course toward
Nichtmute, the next colony. . . . I came upon an infant lying
among the snow-covered hummocks near the trail. Had I not
possessed a well-trained lead dog, the infant would have been torn
to shreds in less time than it takes to tell it. . . . I picked up the
baby and discovered that its body was still warm with life. After
cleaning the grass from its mouth with my fingers, I wrapped it in
furs, placed it on my sled, turned the dogs about, and headed back
to the village I had just left. . . . When the baby’s mother was
brought to me, I gave the child into her arms and told her to care
for it and raise it. The mother’s apparent happiness at the
recovery of her baby that she had put out to die convinced me that
she had resorted to infanticide under stress of some economic
necessity, perhaps starvation, widowhood, or illegitimacy. My
subsequent inquiry brought to light that famine and starvation had
prompted the deed.” (Garber 1947:99)
Other reasons for infanticide:
“Physical defects in newborn babies and multiple
births often force the Eskimo mother to resort to
infanticide. If a child is born physically deformed, it
rarely survives the day of its birth. . . . mothers of
deformed children possess a distinct hate for their
offspring and have not the least hesitancy in the
matter of their destruction. During my long and
intimate life with the western Eskimo, I found only
two cases of living deformed children.” (Garber
1947:99)
“If twins are born to a western Eskimo mother and one of
them happens to be a female, she is foredoomed to
destruction.” (Garber 1947:100)
“. . . one rarely, if ever, finds living twins among the Eskimo.
Even though they do exist it is very difficult to identify them
because they are usually separated at the time of their birth.”
(Garber 1947:100)
“When twins are born, one at least must either be killed
or given away, for an Eskimo woman cannot possibly
rear both children at the same time. If one is a boy and
the other a girl, it is invariable the girl that is made the
victim. Boys, in fact, are seldom exposed, for they will
support their parents when they grow up.” (Jenness
1913-1918:166)
“When they find it necessary to sacrifice the life of a
child, it is not accomplished publicly, and rarely in a
gruesome, murderous fashion.” (Garber 1947:100)
“In some of the cases I have observed the mother has
exhibited a pronounced love for her baby but had to
squelch her affection in order that the older members of her
family might continue their existence. On the other hand,
some mothers have demonstrated a marked hardness and
indifference towards the necessity of destroying their
babies.” (Garber 1947:100)
“Although it is the child’s mother who usually performs
the actual killing, I have known cases in which the father
either performed the deed or was instrumental in having
it done.” (Garber 1947:100)
“I knew a married man who had committed adultury with
his stepdaughter. A child was born, and the father,
having an intense dread of the penalty he might have to
pay under the white man’s civil laws, drowned the infant
in the river.” (Garber 1947:100)
Grandmothers too seemed to be in a favored position
to determine the fate of a newborn. The elderly female
in the extended family was considered the “food boss”
in the igloo. No one could take any food without her
permission.
Old Nalungiaq told Rasmussen after
stating her views on infanticide, “If my daughter
Quertiliq had a girl child I would strangle it at once. If I
did not, I think I would be a bad mother.” (Rasmussen
1931:140)
Social Reasons:
•
Woman M. had a boy from her first marriage. When
she married her second husband N., the latter
decided to kill the child “because he had another
father.” (p.621)
•
The woman Nulianoaq had a small boy who one day
broke her soapstone pot, a highly valued
possession. In her rage the mother stabbed the
child with her knife. The child died shortly after.
•
A comparison is made with dog teams:
“bitches simply don’t pull as hard as male dogs
do.”
•
If a woman suckles a female infant for 2-3 years,
she has not the chance of having a son during
that period. The daughter is killed in order to
make room, hopefully, for a son.
“I have not discovered a single case of voluntary
abortion. . . . The very idea of destroying a child during
gestation is repugnant to primitive Eskimo women.”
(Garber 1947:99)